data gathering
Locked
 
|
I like the idea of informal data gathering: http://www.randomiseme.org/ "RCTs are used by scientists to find out what works best. Here, you can create a trial on anything you wish, and participate in trials set up by other people." -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda. -- George W. Bush ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Glen wrote:
> I like the idea of informal data gathering: > > http://www.randomiseme.org/ > > "RCTs are used by scientists to find out what works best. Here, you can > create a trial on anything you wish, and participate in trials set up by > other people." > I like the *idea* as well, however reviewing the active and completed trials leaves me rather underwhelmed. I tried to go through the tutorial and see if I could ascertain (or even intuit) how well their methodology should work. It didn't seem very promising. In particular, it doesn't look like they offer "laymen" enough guidance in what makes for a good sample set or "enforcing" it? The style of questions asked also seem likely to suffer various selection biases? For example, among their completed trials the first two (1-how to remember things; 2-does complementing th ebarista improve my chances of free coffee) were declared "completed" yet the first one consisted of a sample set of 8 and the second a sample set of 11 ? The first one apparently onlyr *required 1 participant?* while the second required 100 (but as declared complete with 11?). I guess I was only mildly surprised (in a disappointing way) at the inanity of the questions to date. As I remember the early days of Kickstarter, most of the projects were pretty inane but as some really good examples came on, more followed. I find the "Whitehouse.gov" petitions nearly equally inane, so there is good company here. Maybe it is just "internet culture"? Perhaps it is too early to evaluate this? These all seem like good tools *in principle*, I wonder what it takes to make them good tools *in practice*? I suppose an easy, trite answer is, *good participation*, and maybe it really is that simple? Kind of like (presumably) democracy, the free market, and innovation. hmmmm? - Steve ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Steve Smith wrote at 06/28/2013 11:56 AM:
> These all seem like good tools *in principle*, I wonder what it takes to > make them good tools *in practice*? I suppose an easy, trite answer > is, *good participation*, and maybe it really is that simple? Kind of > like (presumably) democracy, the free market, and innovation. Yeah, I agree with you. I particularly enjoyed trial 156: http://randomiseme.org/trials/156 "As you know, people in Britain are often anaemic. Sometimes this is due to poor diet, but most often it's due to vampires. We need people who live in the vampire infested counties of British isles (consult Wikipedia for your local prevalence) to consume garlic on a daily basis, or not." I had a similar feeling about Quora when it started. A friend of mine gave me an account before it went public and I tried interacting, asking and answering questions to my best ability. I was put off by the snarky answers and inane questions. So I killed my account. But now it seems to be somewhat interesting, though far less successful than stackoverflow, I suppose. In the end, we have the age-old aphorism: "You get what you put in" or "you reap what you sow." I expect that if randomiseme.org were _used_ by people who know and care about the difference between good data and bad, then it would become useful. Not surprisingly, this is why I still use Google+, but avoid Facebook like the plague. And, just like the transition from the internet to the WWW, I expect I'll soon have to abandon G+ as well. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com Talking about non-linear mathematics is like talking about non-elephant zoology. -- Stanislaw Ulam ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Glen -
I took an early interest in social networking and in the potential power of crowd sourcing but got burned out looking for the needle in the haystack or the gem in the coal-bin as it were. I am highly motivated to believe it can work but the dearth of good examples seems to continue. Wikipedia and Google Search are the closest things to success stories I know of, but I may not be thinking hard enough. Search, of course, mostly doesn't depend on "smart usage", though I am surprised sometimes when the rank ordering of results reflects some aspect of pop culture that I am clueless about (which is many)... Wikipedia is so much more intentional and despite the crowd-source for content, I think the somewhat hierarchical control of style and nature provided by the network of paid and volunteer staff keeps it (somewhat) coherent beyond what a true anarchy might. My wife and daughters are big on Pinterest but I've never taken the plunge... I get some good "forwards" from them in their respective domains. It seems as if the mail-list or group paradigm is still generally the best "referral" service for me. Despite my snarkiness now and again on FRIAM I think I do get more signal/noise than many other places. I think one of the things I'm contemplating on this general topic is what does it take to transcend the mundane in these environments? There must be precedent in analog systems for noise cancellation, etc.? On your implied recommendation, I've just joined Quora and was pleased to find right away a colleague who I highly respect (someone I would "follow" on nearly any forum) there already. We'll see how it all works out. - Steve > Steve Smith wrote at 06/28/2013 11:56 AM: >> These all seem like good tools *in principle*, I wonder what it takes to >> make them good tools *in practice*? I suppose an easy, trite answer >> is, *good participation*, and maybe it really is that simple? Kind of >> like (presumably) democracy, the free market, and innovation. > Yeah, I agree with you. I particularly enjoyed trial 156: > > http://randomiseme.org/trials/156 > > "As you know, people in Britain are often anaemic. Sometimes this is due > to poor diet, but most often it's due to vampires. > > We need people who live in the vampire infested counties of British > isles (consult Wikipedia for your local prevalence) to consume garlic on > a daily basis, or not." > > I had a similar feeling about Quora when it started. A friend of mine > gave me an account before it went public and I tried interacting, asking > and answering questions to my best ability. I was put off by the snarky > answers and inane questions. So I killed my account. But now it seems > to be somewhat interesting, though far less successful than > stackoverflow, I suppose. > > In the end, we have the age-old aphorism: "You get what you put in" or > "you reap what you sow." I expect that if randomiseme.org were _used_ > by people who know and care about the difference between good data and > bad, then it would become useful. Not surprisingly, this is why I still > use Google+, but avoid Facebook like the plague. And, just like the > transition from the internet to the WWW, I expect I'll soon have to > abandon G+ as well. > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Glen-
Along with finding an esteemed colleague worth following right away, I found this wonderful nugget buried away deep in the archives: Answers that used to be on this list but which have been deleted:
It was a wonderfully Glen Ropella-styled answer! Neither of these terms (as used here) are part of my regular
vernacular, yet somehow you managed to tease out the essence of
both terms in this context quite well! - Steve ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Steve Smith wrote at 06/28/2013 12:53 PM:
> * 11 votes: Glen Ropella <http://www.quora.com/Glen-Ropella>'s answer > to What is the difference between a "tool" and a "douchebag"? > > <http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-a-tool-and-a-douchebag> > > --- "A douchebag is a specific tool for a specific use. Tools are > more generally useful." > > It was a wonderfully Glen Ropella-styled answer! > > Neither of these terms (as used here) are part of my regular vernacular, > yet somehow you managed to tease out the essence of both terms in this > context quite well! Heh, that reminds me of this piece of "pop culture" I stumbled into this morning (and by searching for it on Google, my usage and clickage puts it that much closer to the top): "Blurred Lines" Is Cocky, Yes. But Rapey? No. http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/06/27/robin_thicke_s_blurred_lines_is_cocky_yes_but_rapey_and_misogynistic_no.html "If you want more proof that the repetitive "I know you want it" chorus isn't creepy, let's do a closer reading of the other lyrics. The end of the chorus goes: "The way you grab me/ must wanna get nasty/ go ahead, get at me." The last part, "go ahead, get at me" very clearly kills any "rapey" vibe. In fact, he's putting the ball in her court by telling her to make the move and not the other way around. He's saying, "You're clearly turned on by me. Go for it." (Again: Douche? Sure. Rapist? Probably not.)" I'll never get that time back. [sigh] -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella I'm living easy where the sun doesn't shine ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |